Discussion in 'Football Forum' started by Pogue Mahone, Jul 17, 2019.
Read a couple of articles over the weekend. Am I supposed to be impressed?
Compared to the regular UK press stories, yes.
I doubt it. I had read countless Sam Lee tweets on City's transfers but never a single article. Those journalists will still get the narrative out on Twitter.
You are more likely to have a subscription if someone in your close group does. They are aware that most of the people who read their articles are not subscribers, but they are increasing awareness in their products.
Very much like the Netflix stance on shared accounts, it brings in free publicity.
You're not supposed to be anything.
I'm considering giving it a go with the £30 for the year offer but I already read an unhealthy amount of business news across like 4 paywall sites each day that it's probably better if I don't. BBC football and r/soccer will probably be my lot. Unless it's really really good, in which case premium content is worth paying for (like the financial times), but I can't really see how good it is unless I sign up for the free trial, at which point may as well just pay the £30.
You can cancel any time up to the point you pay the 30 quid, so if you sign up today you'll pay on Sept 6th. That's what I'm doing, set a reminder for the date and will cancel if I don't use it.
I suppose that's fair enough, and makes sense, just not sure how much their new employers would want them to say on Twitter considering they've gotten a hefty pay rise, we shall soon see in the January transfer window and beyond.
I personally just come to the Caf to read anything sports wise, not sure I'd want to pay to read tabloid stuff, and the super analytical pieces don't really interest me anymore.
You'll get all the interesting bits on here through discussion anyway. I'm going to give it a shot for a year as £30 is only £2.50 a month. I like that the journalists hold some round tables so you can ask them questions about the articles.
They can't have seen much of him then. Very comfortable on the ball and a decent passer. I think it's obvious that City wanted him, Guardiola has admitted it, but we were unwilling to pay £80m + for him. I agree with that view, it is overpriced, but I thought the same about van Dijk. Hopefully Stones can step up this season.
«The Owner» article was fun! I normally can’t stand most football «journalists» but this actually seems quite alright.
I’m still not paying though!
he seemed like an utter twat
As a big NFL (Green Bay) fan I have been reading their stuff for about 18 months. It makes a lot of sense in America where they to take 'sports writing' a lot more seriously than we seem to in the UK. Its a lot more than just match reports and transfer rumours, it is more about sport in general, the stories away from the pitch, analysis on a wider scale. For instance there is a story currently up about why the concussion rates have fallen for the Green Bay team and their use of technology in helmets which was quite interesting. If The Athletic can bring the same level of writing and interesting topics to the UK then I'm all for it. The article on the changes Ole has made behind the scenes was a nice little insight for example. Not saying its for everybody but for 30 days free, its worth a looksy. Good sports writing as opposed to the sensationalist guff that is bandied about on Twitter (although you still do get that!)
Yes, I made my first post about this......
Do some research into their articles. No need for click bait shit with a pay wall.
He seemed like Sam Allardyce had just bought a club.
Defend the press if you wish, they write such utter bullshit day in day out. The vast majority are stealing a living and the standard of writing is appalling.
Got quite a reception BTL. Some weren't happy.
I'm not defending the press in general. They are mostly hopeless twats but are set up to fail having to use clickbait shit.
That's not the case with The Athletic. They have the license to be creative and write about actual decent topics that are of interest to me at least. No catchy shit headlines with 5 lines of the story and no sources at all.
The football coverage has been good early doors. Some very interesting stories so far.
Idiots tend to miss the distinction between sports reporters and sports writers. The former report upon news surrounding the clubs/teams/players based within the patch they cover. The latter don’t. The UK has some of the best sports writers in the industry. Even then, we have sports reporters and journalists that have helped put peadophiles in prison. Or investigate ‘untouchable’ behemoths like Team Sky, or uncover Russian state sponsored doping. By plonking these people in the same group you’re doing those stories a disservice.
As for most of the transfer ‘lies’. Most of them are peddled by lads on their work experience. Or entry level news folk that need to get their name attached to a byline. I’ve done it. That’s a different world altogether; one very different to the one that the likes of David Conn, Danny Taylor and Matt Lawton operate in.
While quality is important, I hope they will also focus on speed. Timely reports on the latest trending stories would be wonderful. Even better if they are insightful.
I would be more inclined to sign up if they can also serve as a reliable 1-stop shop for all my United news.
Does anyone know if they do this well for their US sports coverage for the big teams at least?
If they aspire to be more like FT rather than The Blizzard, they need to get this right.
I mean, yeah it's obviously better than the Mirror and such but it seems like they took the writers who used to create TLDR stories for The Observer and charge you more money for it.
Mods can you please change this guy's name to Nietzsche7? I'm questioning my existence here.
Only hearing about this now. Which maybe says a lot considering I am a massive reader of the Guardian cohort that have left. If Daniel Taylor (consistent award-winning football writer) is leading a group leaving (following AC Jimbo et al. from the podcast side of things) then really the Guardian must not be paying or promoting.
Notable last year that the Football Weekly podcast was repeatedly asking for "contributions" from listeners, so something is going on. Sad to hear really.
Must go now and check out "The Athletic" (terrible name BTW) - if they have any free content.
IMO people will not pay for journalism never-mind sports or football journalism.
No chance I'd pay for this, everything will be summarised on Twitter anyway and anything behind a paywall can be copy and pasted by someone.
I actually read the articles via reddit.
@Wumminator 's first article:
Sports journalism's biggest problem: Our spoilt and overly entitled correspondents.
Remember hearing very similar stories when Moyes, LVG, and Mourinho came in. iPads, trees being planted at the training ground, food selection, etc. Take it all with a grain of salt.
Depends if you can be arsed to read good in depth stories or not.
If not then it's not for you.
Ha. Fair enough.
Btw Nietzsche would say be come who you are.
I might be cutting off my nose to spite my face, as it seems the content so far is decent (based on feedback from this thread), but there just seems something odd to me about turning journalists into the story, which is what this Athletic launch has done. I'm not going to sign up to a paid for site out of loyalty to a favourite journalist.
Sam Lee and Jack Pitt-Brooke both produced decent City content over the years, so shame that I'll no longer read them, but I'm sure someone else will fill the gap. It's journalism, no-one is irreplaceable.
Won't be long until they snap up Balague, Luckhurst and Kaveh .
The difference to me seems like the quality has drastically gone up because they no longer need make it tantalising to get people to click. The article about the inner workings of the transfer market especially goes in depth about how shady transfer business is and how good or bad agents are and how clubs are trying to get around agents by directly contacting each other.
For example: I never realized (but it seems obvious now) that all major club chairmen and sporting directors are in a WhatsApp group together. And that there’s a subscription service that lets club advertise what players they want and what they want to sell to cut out the middlemen.
There's no way I'd part with my own money to legitimize such a juvenile and empty 'profession'. They already think they're far more important than they are.
Woodward spamming Rummenigge through Whatsapp instead of e-mail. Very clever.
Sure but Nick aligned better to Nietzsche compared to Kierkeggard or Sartre.
They don't sign up morons.
Unfortunately for them.
I think the Football Weekly podcast has improved since Jimbo left and I spent most of last season constantly debating whether or not to stop listening to The Totally Football Show.
I wouldn't believe either of those without being shown concrete proof. It would give away too much entering into negotiations for a start.
I could perhaps seeing either situation being true with lower league clubs but not when it comes to dealing with "assets" worth in the millions.
Don't know about you, but has Koeman said anything yet?
Separate names with a comma.